Page 874 - Week 03 - Thursday, 14 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
December last year. As a result of examination of the Bill since that time, it has proved necessary to correct a couple of drafting errors and also to clarify the meaning of some provisions in the Bill, but those amendments do not alter the intention of any of the provisions in the Bill.
Madam Speaker, I think it is fair to say that the issues that are likely to be raised in the debate on the Bill are many. They include, of course, the banning of how-to-vote cards. They include the public funding scheme that is proposed in the Bill and on which there clearly are differing views. Another issue that will arise is the allowing of non-party candidates to be grouped on ballot-papers and also the intention by the Liberals, I believe, to make provision for itinerant electors to vote in ACT elections. There are also proposed amendments to prevent the registration of parties with names that are frivolous and so on, and, as we have heard, there will be amendments proposed about the possibility of voting fraud in the ACT. There is also a proposal now from Mr Stevenson requiring voters to produce identification and also requiring voters to vote only at their nearest polling place. I believe that it has been extremely helpful for a number of the proposed amendments to have been circulated early on. It is certainly a help when there is a very complex piece of legislation for proposed amendments to be ordered in some fashion and for members to know the nature of them.
There is one proposed amendment which I would like to draw attention to, one that arose last Friday from Mr Humphries. It is an amendment that has the effect of altering the transfer value or altering the means by which the transfer values are applied to surplus ballot-papers counted to successful candidates. Madam Speaker, I would like to point out that Mr Humphries's proposed amendment is completely contrary to the Hare-Clark system. Not only is it contrary to the Tasmanian Hare-Clark system; it is also completely contrary to the terms contained in the Hare-Clark referendum options description sheet. Mr Humphries, I believe, has made a significant departure from what the voters of the ACT requested when they were voting on the new electoral system for the ACT. The Government will oppose this amendment. As I say, the proposed change is a significant variation on the Tasmanian Hare-Clark system and it is completely inconsistent with the referendum options description sheet.
I am very surprised that Mr Humphries would put forward such a proposal when he has been so pious about what he sees as departures from the Hare-Clark system. He has come forward with a very significant departure, the effect of which would be to increase the effective value of some voters' ballot-papers, and that in turn could change the whole election outcome.
Mr Humphries: It improves the transferability of people's votes.
MS FOLLETT: Shame on you, Mr Humphries! You have been shown to be extremely hypocritical on this matter.
Mr Humphries: It helps if you understand the system, Chief Minister.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .